MR Round Table: Why Can’t We Stop Talking About Kim Kardashian?

What can be said about Kim Kardashian that has not already been said?

Yes, it is rare that a sex tape should be made available for public consumption, and based on the tenets that inform the tape in question: a crude display of nudity, the desensitization of intimacy and an unfortunate note on the state of celebrity within American culture, a career can be made. It is even rarer that once the novelty of such a tape wears off, the anterior career can proliferate so comprehensively and seep into the zeitgeist so seamlessly that the public consciousness is made to forget about the tape altogether.

Kim Kardashian is an important case study of our time. She embodies a principle that the American dream is built upon, which is that anyone can make it. She also takes it one step further, proving and reproving with each magazine cover that impressively seems to push a different pressure point in spite of its recurring sameness, that to become rich and famous, to live our country’s dream, the only mandatory talent you must retain is thick enough skin to handle a constant, public reminder that you don’t have talent.

The cover of Paper Magazine’s “Break the Internet” issue, which features a naked Kim Kardashian, began circulating Tuesday night before the magazine has hit stands thanks largely in part to her Instagram account, and no one has stopped talking about it since. Here, team Man Repeller hastily joins the conversation.

Leandra Medine: On the Paper website, the prelude to Kim Kardashian’s cover story says, “For our winter issue we gave ourselves one assignment: break the Internet.”

Amelia Diamond: Do you think they broke the Internet?

LM: The problem with this cover is that the novelty of Kim Kardashian’s ass has completely worn off.

Charlotte Fassler: It’s like a TBT to her sex tape, which is what put her on the map to begin with.

LM: I’m curious about the allure of Kim Kardashian.

Kayla Tanenbaum: She’s also the epitome of the modern celebrity in that she’s famous for being famous. More than anyone, she’s that person.

Cristina Couri: Oh yeah. Do you know how many Instagram followers she has? Guess. If you had to guess.

LM: 13 million.

CF: 21 million.

CC: More.

LM: More than 13 million? 21 million!?

CF: Did I guess that exactly?

CC: I think she’s at 22 now. It’s fascinating.

LM: I feel like she has the ability to totally change — she’s like Oprah — she can totally change the trajectory of someone’s business.

AD: She is not Oprah.

CC: She’s not Oprah. Amelia’s going to be upset.

LM: Sorry I said that! But her clout is kind of like Oprah’s.

CF: I guess with Kim Kardashian I just so don’t care at all. I’ve never been interested in watching the Kardashians’ show, my knowledge of the Kardashians spans from whatever I hear in this office. I don’t, per se, understand the allure of the family and of her celebrity. To me, she only was sort of on my radar when she started dating Kanye West.

KT: I never watched The Kardashians either but I think it’s really interesting that even though we’re all sitting around saying we don’t care about Kim Kardashian—

CC: No, I’m fascinated. I don’t care. I kept looking at this picture.

LM: I find her very impressive. I really do.

KT: I wonder about the cover, like Leandra said, it’s not particularly novel, and I agree. Why are we discussing it? Is it because it’s Kim Kardashian? Is it because it’s nudity? Or is it because because they so clearly stated their motive to make something go viral? I wonder why this is even a discussion point if it’s true that Kim Kardashian naked, and nude women on the cover of magazines, isn’t particularly shocking anymore.

AD: I think in sort of a funny way she’s portrayed in a different light than she has been recently. I think it’s a little bit tongue-in-cheek, and I think she’s making fun of herself in a way that she’s not that often…

KT: She seems like she’s in on the joke.

AD: Yeah, she does. And I think they do it well. Everyone is speculating: is it photoshopped or not? I think that’s part of the point, too. They’re not trying to pretend it’s not. In fact, I kept saying to everyone it’s clearly got to be photoshopped because she’s so tall on it. That’s when I saw it on my phone, but when I looked at it online I realized she’s standing on a box, which is something they’d normally hide under the gown. They purposefully don’t hide that crate, and to that I think it’s interesting that they’re kind of like, “Yeah this is fabricated.” I mean, they lubed her butt up so that she would look plastic.

LM: So this is playing with a lot of millennial motifs, right? Because it’s Kim Kardashian, it’s attempting to break the Internet, and it’s imbuing a lot—it’s placing a lot of irony in the entire production.

CF: And by its medium. It’s breaking the Internet with something that’s in print.

LM: That’s such a good point.

KT: And the magazine is not even out yet.

LM: You have to order it. You have to order a print copy! I didn’t even think of that.

AD: As we’re speaking right now, it’s Wednesday, and I think it goes live for sale tomorrow, Thursday. [Ed note: according to WWD, the issue hits stands November 19.]

LM: But can I ask you a question? What is this story going to say that no other story or episode of Keeping Up with the Kardashians has said before?

AD: What if it does say something really different? Like we all find out that Kim Kardashian has been majoring in animal psychology something?

LM: Or that she was supposed to be on that test rocket because she moonlights as a rocket scientist — it’s her side hustle.

AD: This is sort of off topic, but because you talked about the millennial thing, I think what’s interesting or boring — I can’t tell — is that so many memes have come out of it. The cast of Seinfeld is coming out of her butt.

CC: How is this more millennial than the Vogue cover? That thing had a hashtag on it.

AD: I think this cover is more interesting than the Vogue cover.

CF: This magazine embraces irony. Vogue was very serious.

LM: Even though Anna’s editor letter did say, “This issue is about ‘virality’ on the Internet. And who better to epitomize that than Kim Kardashian and Kanye West?”

CF: They were definitely self-referential to it being uncharacteristic of Vogue, but I think they tried to steer as far away from irony as they could.

KT: From what I remember from the Editor’s Letter, Anna addressed that it was uncharacteristic to have them on the cover, but actually Vogue means this so it’s really not. I remember her drawing a really logical argument for why it makes sense.

CC: I remember her talking about how she’s such a force in our culture, or something like that, and how she almost serves as a barometer for our culture.

LM: I’m curious about how this happened, how Kim Kardashian rose to the level of fame that she did, only because I feel like as much as doors can be opened for you and the Internet is an incredible place to inform what you can do, where you can go, how popular you can become… I’m thinking specifically about Alex from Target, that photo and how viral it went— it’s so fascinating, and it’s interesting that he was able to quadruple to tenth power his following in one day, but now what? What is her staying power all about?

CF: If we want to take it back to the roots, she marked the beginning of Internet virality with her sex tape with Ray-J.

KT: But why and how did she eclipse Paris Hilton who had her own sex tape?

AD: It seems like Paris Hilton sort of dropped out of the game. Kim Kardashian was just smart about it.

KT: But what’s the difference between the two of them?

CF: Kris Jenner was smart about it.

LM: The difference between the two of them is that Kim Kardashian didn’t necessarily come from the abundance of wealth that Paris Hilton did. She certainly did not grow up slumming it, but she also wasn’t an heiress. Her dad was a lawyer. The family received any recognition or clout at all because he defended OJ Simpson. It’s a very unique, modern American situation.

AD: I also think she’s different in that during that time, 2000s sort of, that’s when it was very bubble gum, tan, pop, blonde, Juicy sweatpants, that LA-look. Kim Kardashian, especially back then, looked very different than anything else we were seeing in the media. She’s part Armenian, so she had darker skin, thicker eyebrows, she was short, she had a totally different body type. I remember the first time like the media being like, this different-looking person is hot and beautiful. I mean that’s something. People took an interest in her because she didn’t look like everyone else.

KT: I think it’s weird people haven’t gotten sick of her yet. I don’t think it’s weird that she’s blown up, but I’m impressed with how long she’s maintained this cultural interest in her. I guess dating Kanye was the next step, and that helped.

CC: I feel like she’s the most famous celebrity in the world. I really do.

LM: And she is apparently quite nice. I know that sounds absurd, but she gives everyone the time of day. I’m not even famous and sometimes I’m like, “Grr!”

AD: I’ve heard that from people who have been on shoots with her: she’s sweet and polite.

CF: Even in her reality show she’s always the very diplomatic one whose surrounded by drama.

LM: Right. She’s really quiet during those fights.

KT: She also doesn’t drink.

LM: She doesn’t? Smart.

CF: I think that she sees things as business opportunities. It’s very clear. Whereas other girls who say yes to reality shows aren’t thinking of them in the same way she is. They are thinking fame, immediacy. I think what’s interesting about her is that she’s so present in the moment of whatever is hyper-popularized at whatever time, however is always doing it one step above anyone else. Their show is still running.

CC: And they’ve had so many spinoffs. Now it’s Kourtney and Khloé Take the Hamptons.

CF: I think that—I mean the show started right around the same time—mid to late 2000s—right after her sex tape leaked. That led to, “Oh, we want to know more about this girl.” This is the crux of reality television where anyone and everyone has a show.

KT: But her show still came after Jessica Simpson’s show, after the Osborne’s…

CF: After Simple Life. I mean yeah, the Osborne’s were a smashing success as a family as well, however that family was a little too messed up to be able to sustain ten seasons of a reality show.

AD: When someone has a team of people dedicated to hating them for whatever reason, or being against them, this other side will rise and be greater than the other side, who then has to oppose that. They have to be like, “I don’t get this thing with her, I’m going to be anti-Kim.” And it sort of builds this monster. I think Kim built that monster.

LM: Right, you build teams. It’s sort of like the equivalent of football but for women.

AD: Totally. But similar to how Howard Stern had so many people who hated him, and they hated him so much that they tuned into his show every week and gave the ratings. That’s part of why he became so popular. I think a large part of that began the initial projection to Kim Kardashian fame. For every five haters, there are ten champions. She cultivated and dealt with that while she’s so nice to her fans, as you said. She builds them up and then they build her up, like a cycle.

CC: Did you see Kim’s tweet about this: “And they say I didn’t have a talent. Try balancing a champagne class on your ass. LOL.”

AD: That’s her being in on the joke.

LM: She’s doing that Miuccia Prada thing, and I hope Prada doesn’t roll over because I just compared her to Kim Kardashian, but it’s like we were saying with her Resort ad campaign that just rolled out, she’s so aware of what people can compare the ads to, and she’s so in on the joke that we, the spectators, don’t even realize there is a joke.

CF: I just have a question about Kim Kardashian on the cover and the overt sexuality of it. Yeah, I think she’s in on the joke and it’s ironic and it’s recreating an image that already exists by the same photographer and what not, but I just sort of wonder because the image, it does have a bit of a grotesque look to it, proportionally and in the way that it’s styled. I just sort of wonder what the feminist backlash has been for it.

LM: Oh, I’ll be curious to see that too.

CF: I don’t know. Is Kim Kardashian really someone who’s embracing the female body to a degree or is she calling attention to the fact that it’s hyper-sexualized and then in doing so making it okay for people on the Internet to post a million memes of Krispy Kreme doughnuts next to her ass.

KT: The thing I really like about the photograph is that she’s making eye contact with the camera and smiling. I think, just to give a quick comparison, American Apparel ads, for example, people have so many issues with them is that these women completely like they were caught off guard, like they were being spied on, and in that way, violated. Kim, though, she’s looking at the camera and in that way is a) addressing the viewer and b) has some control over the image. I think I would have an absolute problem with it if she weren’t making eye contact.

CF: Yeah, it definitely doesn’t have that creepy voyeuristic look to it. I’m just curious, not even about the image itself, more about the reaction that will then create the response to it and the discussion around it.

AD: A main one being that she’s a mom. There is something to be said about the fact that maybe now that she’s a mom in the present tense term and is going to be for the rest of her life, maybe you consider your child when you put yourself out there…

KT: But she has a sex tape.

AD: She had a sex tape — and when she was how young, though? I think that you make a lot of not smart decisions throughout every point in your life, especially when you’re younger, so who cares whether it was a choice or not? Not who cares, but it’s not relevant to the point. It’s interesting to think about this cover years later — regardless of the sex tape — I wonder if she did consider her daughter. Maybe she considered it art, because when I look at the original photograph and I think, “What a great picture. That would be fun to frame.” The bare butt, though, if I were… I don’t know. I feel like it’s interesting with someone with a daughter would put that out there. That’s saying to your daughter, “You can put your bare butt on a magazine too.” And maybe that is something she’s fine with. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, it’s just something to consider.

LM: Consider the circumstance. If this were Cindy Sherman’s magazine cover, wouldn’t the conversation be like, “Wow! What a powerful message she’s sending to women!” Are we blinded by the label here? I remember when I was profiled in The New York Times, when I had just started Man Repeller, the reporter compared me to Cindy Sherman. If you think about Cindy Sherman, she sort of is, I’m not going to say the first personal style blogger, but she’s a very expositional artist who uses herself as her canvas.

CF: She was the start of the selfie.

AD: Yeah, but she’s an artist. Kim’s not. The photographer, however, is a different matter, and his subject matter makes her art.

KT: I think the currency that we’re talking about, what differentiates them, what separates Kim Kardashian from Cindy Sherman from a photographer from any old blogger is intention and control. Cindy Sherman is obviously intentional in the way that she styles herself and shows images of herself. I think that Kim Kardashian hasn’t always appeared in control, even if she secretly is. The sex tape and posing nude for Playboy is very different from posing nude if you’re Cindy Sherman. That’s not a judgment. I’m just saying I think people take those things differently.

CF: I think Kim Kardashian, the reason she’s still around and the reason she’s relevant, why we’re talking about her is because all of her choices have been hyper-calculated. When you look at the trajectory of what she’s done, it feels like she is very savvy and business-minded. Paper clearly approached her with a concept, and I’m sure she was collaborative in it. She wasn’t submissive.

LM: I think that by the rules of what I consider the most ideal version of feminism, the female response to this cover is, “Let her be her. Who cares?”

KT: Feminism shouldn’t be prescriptive.

LM: I think that’s all I got. I didn’t find the cover offensive at all.

AD: I felt it a little un-shocking.

LM: I laughed when you sent me a screenshot last night. I said out loud, “oh my gosh.” But it was inflected more like “again!?” She’s sort of like the boy who cried wolf, except she’s not crying wolf, she’s crying ass.

KT: I don’t think there’s anything she could do that would be truly shocking besides becoming a rocket scientist. To be the complete opposite of what she is. More nudity isn’t going to shock anyone.

CF: I feel like at the end of the day, you can’t help but pay attention to it because you literally can’t miss it when you’re looking at it. It’s just sort of an empty promise of not much.

LM: The thing that concerns me is that is what Kim Kardashian seems to be is a low common denominator for conversation. What came out of this conversation that we just had? Did we come to any sweeping conclusions? Did we have any ground-breaking, interesting comments or point of views to share? No. We just had a conversation about Kim Kardashian. Is this going to elicit a larger conversation? Is this going to feed the Man Repeller community’s engine the way that previous roundtables have? I don’t know.

AD: It’s going to feed the following of Kim Kardashian. The fact that we’re having this conversation… I mean Paper magazine just got mentioned how many times?

LM: That’s the other thing. Not the other thing, but is this conversation a reflection of her trade? Is her trade just a consistent low common denominator that won’t give up, that keeps us tuned into its frequencies simply by virtue of how loud it is?

AD: Maybe we need that. Everyone’s going to have something to talk about at their awkward work dinner tonight. It’s better than the weather.

LM: It’s going to be a change from the weather, even though I maintain that the weather is an important conversation in New York is because it’s so erratic.

KT: I feel like it’s possible to have an interesting conversation about Kim Kardashian but not necessarily one about her ass on this cover.

CF: I think this just goes back to my initial point: I’m not that interested in Kim Kardashian. I’m just not that into her.

CC: We all seem sort of indifferent and we all seem to have the same perspective.

LM: I’m really not indifferent. I’m so fascinated by her celebrity. I want to understand how she became as famous as she did and how she has retained the celebrity. I’d love to understand why we can’t stop talking about Kim Kardashian — why we can’t stop talking about talking about Kim Kardashian.

CF: I’d agree with that. I’m not interested in reading gossip about her, or watching her show. I’m interested in her as a character who has risen to such extreme popularity, but I’m not that interested in following her Instagram or her Twitter, actually following her as a celebrity icon.

LM: I like following her. I don’t know why. I try to figure it out every time I peek through her photos.

KT: I guess she dresses pretty well these days.

CF: Kanye, man.

LM: But even that is so prescribed because it’s not… There’s no real style there. It’s very formulaic. It was so great the first time I saw her in a camel coat, the second time was cool too, I wrote about it the third time, but by the forth time I was like, “Okay I get it.” I get that there is… She’s terrible at troubleshooting too, huh? I get that there is a formula here, I just don’t trust that she knows how to move beyond what’s been prescribed to her. She’s not a flexible or strategic thinker. She will wear what she’s told to wear. That’s not interesting to me.

KT: She won. We talked about it.

AD: It made me more interested in the photographer.

LM: Really?

AD: This is completely random but I really liked the weird, brown color scheme. I thought that was an interesting choice.

LM: I love that you thought about that.

AD: That’s me, that’s my tap-out. I’m hungry.

LM: My tap-out is Kim Kardashian is the TK of our generation. It’s still soon to tell what she is, but it’s something.

CF: She’s the closest thing to American royalty at this point. What does that say about our country?

KT: Beyoncé, come on.

CC: She’s mastered every corner of the globe.

AD: Even Instagram didn’t take the photo down.

KT: They have a nipple thing, not a butt thing.

LM: I’m so confused about the things that offend people versus the things that don’t and who decides what’s offensive and what’s not. If our ass cracks were on our elbows and we crapped out of our elbows, what would clothing look like? What would we look like?

AD: What would diapers look like?

LM: Kim Kardashian, man.